Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/23/90

Surjit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Saharayn Universal Mult. Society Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Paramjit Singh Adv

15 Sep 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUDHIANA.

                                                Complaint No:  90 dated 02.03.2023.                                                         Date of decision: 15.09.2023. 

Surjit Singh aged about 66 years son of Mukhtiar Singh, r/o. H. No.305, Street No.1, Professor Colony, Pakhowal Road, Near Phullanwal, Tehsil and District Ludhiana-141013. (Mobile No.99143-64162)                                                                                                                              ..…Complainant

                                                Versus

1. Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Society Limited, Branch Office Situated at B-1/367, Guru Nanakpura, Kailash Chownk, Civil Line, Ludhiana, through its Branch Manager/Authorized person.
2. Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Society Limited, Regd. Office at 195, Zone-1, in front of D.B. Mall, M.P. Nagar, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh-462011 through its Managing Director/Authorized person.                                                                                            …..Opposite parties 

Complaint Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act.

QUORUM:

SH. SANJEEV BATRA, PRESIDENT

SH. JASWINDER SINGH, MEMBER

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant             :         Sh. P.S. Chawla, Advocate.

For OPs                          :         Sh. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate (Right of the                                                         OPs to file written statement already                                                             extinguished vide order dated 17.07.2023)

                  

ORDER

PER JASWINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

1.                Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the opposite parties are duly registered financial institution under Multistate Co-operative Society Act, 2002. The representative of opposite party No.1 met and apprised the complainant to invest in their plan to get benefits, upon which the complainant vide membership No.927034000015  took STAR TWO plan of the opposite parties by investing Rs.5,000/- each vide receipt No.034016314745 and receipt No.034016314746 dated 13.06.2016 respectively and the opposite parties issued certificate No.7950009628224 to the complainant.  On 01.02.2023, the complainant lastly visited opposite parties to release the agreed maturity amount but they did not respond and dilly delayed the matter on one pretext or the other. Therefore, the complainant filed the present complaint asserting that the act and conduct of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service and further prayed for refund of the amount of Rs.10,000/- along with interest and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.25,000/- on account of mental agony, harassment and distress. The complainant also claimed litigation expenses of Rs.11,000/-.

2.                Upon notice, Sh. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate appeared and filed power of attorney on behalf of the opposite parties but thereafter, failed to file written statement affidavit and documents despite grant of sufficient opportunity and as such, the right of the opposite parties to file written statement already extinguished vide order dated 17.07.2023.

3.                In evidence, the complainant tendered his affidavit as Ex. CA and reiterated his averments of the complaint. The complainant also placed on record copies of certificates Ex. C1 & Ex. C2 and copies of contribution receipts Ex. C3 and Ex. C4 issued by the opposite parties and closed the evidence.

4.                We have heard the counsel for the complainant and also gone through the complaint, affidavit and documents annexed by the complainant.

5.                In his affidavit Ex. CA, the complainant has reiterated the entire case as set forth in the complaint. The complainant has further proved on record the copy of receipt Ex. C3 and Ex. C4 issued by the opposite parties at the time the amount of Rs.5,000/- each was invested on 13.06.2016 respectively. Though the evidence has gone unrebutted on the file, the certificates Ex. C1 and Ex. C2 reveal that the complainant invested a sum of Rs.5,000/- each with the opposite parties on 13.06.2016. However, amount of maturity and date of maturity is not mentioned in certificates Ex. C1 and Ex. C2. Even rate of interest is not mentioned in the certificates Ex. C1 and Ex. C2. It has been claimed that the amount was invested for a period of 64 months. In these circumstances, it would be just and proper if the opposite parties are directed to refund the invested amount of Rs.10,000/- along with interest @8% from 13.06.2016 till date of actual payment along with composite costs of Rs.10,000/-.

6.                As a result of above discussion, the complaint is partly allowed with an order that the opposite parties shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the refund the invested amount of Rs.10,000/- along with interest @8% from 13.06.2016 to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. The opposite parties shall further pay a composite compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the complainant. Compliance of order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

(Jaswinder Singh)                             (Sanjeev Batra)               Member                                         President  

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:15.09.2023.

Gobind Ram.